Co-op of the Day: 200 Hicks Street

There is no free-standing column in the plan although one is clearly visible in the photo.
The photos look nice, the plan not so much.
If this were an upper floor they would get ask, for a ground floor unit, not so much.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:04 PM

What is the square footage for this place? And who is the target buyer? I guess someone who is sending their kids to a Bklyn private school and is looking to trade a Manhattan comparable apt for this one? I'm not sure who else. Yes, it's pretty, but for that kind of money (and the insanely expensive maintenance) wouldn't you want more space? Again, given the carrying costs, you could definitely find a house instead - esp since, if the house cost a bit more, you could afford to pay more mortgage with the monthly savings of not paying that high maintenance. I guess some people will talk about all the money swirling around this city, but even the rich are starting to suffer a bit in this economy, and this price tag just seems very high, even for a pretty apt, that is this size.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:06 PM

2 million, 3k a month maint and 50% down.

Not a soul on this blog can afford it.

So shut your mouths.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:10 PM

A three bedroom in my brownstone building, just down the street from this, rents for $3500 a month. Admittedly, it's not as nice -- but it is as big, and has a yard. So, this would probably rent for no more than 50% more, at $5000 a month. That would make the annual rent $60,000, and using the 15X annual rent metric -- it should sell for about $900,000. Even if you think the metric is off by a bit -- this place is way way overpriced, and shouldn't sell for more than $1,000,000 or thereabout.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:11 PM

Too long, didn't read.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:12 PM

This place sells to those with multiple homes. Offspring of BH old money, I'd guess...

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:16 PM

Only 36% deduction on a $3,000 monthly maintenance? Why is that? Seems most are 50% right?

People wonder why there's a craze for brownstones and houses. This is why. Just one month of maintenance on this place pays nearly all the property taxes for the entire year on our 2-story brownstone.

Regardless, for this kind of dough I'd want a more spectacular interior. This place is really boring. And ground floor right on the sidewalk, yuck. I'd go for a prewar on PPW with views for this kind of money, were I committed to being in a "white glove" coop building, which I imagine fits some people's lifestyles better than owning a house.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:21 PM

1:11 - I'm a market bear, (having just sold my place to trade up), but I do think this place could rent for more than $5K - I'd say someone who really loves it might pay up to $6K. That would be high for the size, but would account for someone who just loves the taste of this place, which is very nice. So, that would push the metric up a bit more, but it's still way overpriced, and the maintenance cost is a killer. Of course, the fact that they are asking 50% down means they are clearly looking for a buyer who is already wealthy - though those folks are vulnerable in these uncertain times. And why would they want a ground floor unit that is not very big?

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:23 PM

i would never ever ever ever ever want a ground floor apartment especially for 2mill...thats brutal

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:29 PM

This place wold defintely rent for $6k I think, but it is still way overpriced. The monthly common charges are outrageous.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:31 PM

In this building you cannot rent the apt unless it is to a family member.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:33 PM

Yes, that's how most of the nicer buildings in Brooklyn Heights and Upper East side are, 1:33.

You new to NYC?

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:39 PM

There is a buffer of 6-10 feet and a 5 foot tall wrought iron fence. You can't see into the apartment from the street, unless the shades are dropped all the way down. Which they never are - I've been trying to see the interior of this place since they renovated. Nicely done.

I would prefer a ground floor after 20 years of
running into co-op neighbors and waiting for the elevator. This is a noisy corner, though.

Apartments in this building don't hit the market that often, and there are few 3br apartments in the Heights. I bet it sells fairly quickly, even in this market. Just in time for the kids to start smoking pot around the corner from St.Ann's.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:44 PM

1:39 born and raised here-just letting the other folks know since there was convo re rent $. And no, there are quite a few Park Avenue Co-Ops one can rent to non-family members.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:50 PM

yeah, park avenue in the 20's maybe.

if you REALLY think a comparable apartment like this with this kind of maint and 50% down up on Park Avenue/Upper East Side allows renting to non-family, you are looney.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:04 PM

Going to be a skinny buying pool for this place. You need $1 million down and then it will cost you a mere $9K a month to carry the place (pre-tax shelter).

I own an entire house about 10 blocks away. I'd gladly sell it for $1 million + a commitment from someone to pay me $9K per month in perpetuity.

P.S. From the looks of it, this place looks like it's about 1,200 sf or a mere $1,600 psf.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:04 PM

can't speak to the numbers other than i can't afford it, but:

"You can't see into the apartment from the street, unless the shades are dropped all the way down."

yes - the owners have cleverly installed "bottom-up" shades so they can sheild views into the apartment but still get views out and natural light.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:05 PM

WHAT IS SQUARE FOOTAGE?? I mean, shouldn't we be talking about comps here? I mean, I though 1000/psf was very top of market so is this place 2000 sf? Certainly does not look like it is. When you add the outrageous maintenance, does that impact the psf? I think 1.5 would be high price for this pad - that's pretty much the ceiling for top-notch 3BR/2BA in most of prime Bklyn, and even 1 mil can be high for many others.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:12 PM

I think this place is bigger than 1200 sf.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:12 PM

well 2:04, you are wrong, wrong wrong---it is much larger than what you "imagine" it to be!

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:13 PM

well 2:04, you are wrong, wrong wrong---it is much larger than what you "imagine" it to be!

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:13 PM

well 2:04, you are wrong, wrong wrong---it is much larger than what you "imagine" it to be!

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:13 PM

The city is full of ground-floor apartments, and some of them, the ones in the nicer neighborhoods, can be quite pricey. It is not as if ground floors are radioactive as some here seem to think. Plus, there is a deep and fenced areaway between the facade and the sidewalk. Maintenance charges do not matter to someone buying an expensive co-op like this. And some people like ground floor units. I think it is priced about right. It is not comperable to a 3-bedroom apartment in an ordinary brownstone.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:16 PM

Why don't they just list the damn square footage? How would a bank appraise? Or are they figuring the person who buys this needs to mortgage? But again, why would they deal with such a small space if they have that much money?

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:19 PM

Why does everyone assume that EVERYONE wants a house?

Homes in this neck of the woods are money pits.

People who buy here also have a house in Bermuda and one in Aspen. They simply don't want the maintenence issues. So they pay for them...

To suggest someone to buy a house instead as if they've never thought of that just proves that some of you really have no idea of the kind of buyer that a place like this attracts...

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:21 PM

According to my calculations from the website's floorplan, this apartment is approximately 1500 square feet.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:25 PM

I LOVE ground floor apartments. Wouldn't want to live in anything else...

And I'm being serious. What you lose in privacy from the street (although simple bottom up blinds like those seen in these pictures solve that problem) are made up for with the privacy of not having to see neighbors in the hallyways/elevators when you choose not to.

Not for everyone, but I love it.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:27 PM

But why would someone with a houses in Apsen and Bermuda want such a horrifically expensive pied-a-terre that is on the ground floor of a busy corner in Bklyn? I mean, someone with that kind of money to burn could have a lot of other pickings and this place does not seem very special. And people that rich are 1) themselves feeling a pinch these days and 2) rich because they didn't throw money out the window on things like ridiculous maintenance costs. Sometimes I think brokers are just testing the market and trying to drive up comps with this absurd asking prices, or else pricing high to factor in lowballing in today's market...

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:34 PM

condos = trailer parks in the sky.
Except this one is on the ground floor.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:35 PM

I just think it's weird that there's no sf listed - what is the big secret? And if median psf for BH coops is 788, that confirms my understanding that 1000/psf is for top end luxury - so even if this indeed is top end luxury (which is debatable since it's ground floor, no private outdoor space, etc.) and merits 1000/sf, the price is truly ridiculous since the psf costs is way, way above that.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:42 PM

"To suggest someone to buy a house instead as if they've never thought of that just proves that some of you really have no idea of the kind of buyer that a place like this attracts..."

I bet anything the people that own this place are selling so they can buy a brownstone.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:47 PM

This is going to be like the co-op at One Pierrepont that was universally hated here (who would pay THAT?) and was in contract within the week. Brownstoner readers don't get this kind of place -- but there is an audience

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:58 PM

Are the pics pre- and post- staging? The chairs seem to have changed between the pics.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:59 PM

The people selling this are moving to the Vermeil (condo) in Park Slope.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 3:03 PM

Nice building, nice apartment. Nice alternative to a $2.75m house for someone who doesn't need the extra space or headaches of ownership. Low deductibility on maintenance suggests it is going to maintain the building -- all those white gloves -- rather than to an underlying mortgage, so probably the building financials are sound.

Still, it costs approximately 15k/month, even assuming a very low opportunity cost on the downpayment and ignoring the likelihood of price declines. For that price, I'm not seeing it.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 3:05 PM

200 Hicks is an "important address" like 1 Pierrepont and 2 Montague Terrace. This is the smallest apartment in the nicest building. Believe it or not, for a certain segment of the population this IS their starter apartment. Close to the Casino. Close to Grace. Close to the subway to Wall Street.

It's like buying a shack "south of the highway" instead of big place on land north. There are people for whom that is just not how it's done.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 3:11 PM

I am 46 years old, a native of Brooklyn and bought my 4 bed 2 bath Bay Ridge house twenty years ago for 169k. If you would have told me that conversations where 2 million dollars buys you an apartment in Brooklyn would exist twenty years later, I would have said you were nuts. What is even nuttier is that people talk about this with barely an outrage. Let's see 2 million plus maintenance, neighbors on the 2nd floor walking above you, roaches (they live in every apartment building, whether you see them or not) and people leering into your apartment, where do I sign up?

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 3:11 PM

3:03. no, they're not. they're moving to London.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 3:18 PM

"If you would have told me that conversations where 2 million dollars buys you an apartment in Brooklyn would exist twenty years later, I would have said you were nuts."

Please join us in the 21st Century where there are 2 million dollar apartments in Los Angeles, Chicago, Seattle, St. Louis, Baltimore (the new Ritz Carlton condos are sweet!), Washington DC, Austin, Texas, and yes...even in this silly little podunk town called New York City.

Imagine that!!

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 3:22 PM

no, they're moving to newfoundland

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 3:28 PM

"3:03. no, they're not. they're moving to London."

If this is true, no WONDER they are selling for this amount. If they get ask, they'll be LUCKY to get a 950 sf, 2 bedroom for the same price in London.

Remember that when you say NYC is outrgaeous. In the major world city category, it is actually still quite inexpensive.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 3:36 PM

In London hi-rise buildings have very low status - its called council housing and is where the common people live.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 3:49 PM

Everyone always talks about Manhattan comps, but this seems like a Manhattan price. Are you really selling your "small" 2-bedroom in Manhattan for $2 million in order to upgrade to this small 3-bedroom in Brooklyn? Perhaps there is a small segment of the population who pay a huge premium to be in what is perceived of as a "white glove" building and the so-called prestige that comes with it. However, $2 million plus $3,000 maintenance buys you alot in some of the nicest neighborhoods in Brooklyn, so it's hard to make a case that this apartment beats those.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 3:51 PM

The thing is, there is no prestige involved with it, apart from that imagined by the other delusional tenants of the same type of building.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 4:15 PM

3:51, a similar apartment in Manhattan like this (in a similar one the "best" neighborhoods of Manhattan) so let's just say Upper East Side for the sake of conversation...seems similar-ish to Brooklyn Heights, would EASILY cost 4-5 million. EASILY.

Some of you are quite out of touch with Manhattan prices, it seems.

I sold my 2 bedroom DUMP on the Upper West Side last year for nearly 1.8 million. Nothing like this place...not even close.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 4:19 PM

Here is just to give you an idea of what apartments in B location in Manhattan get you (I say B because anything north of 23rd is not prime Chelsea...)

See those in contract units? Now do you see why some might prefer to come to Brooklyn and spend millions less?

And we are talking about a new glass POS compared to one of the most prestigious white glove buildings in Brooklyn Heights...

http://www.prudentialelliman.com/MainSite/NHD/NHDInfo.aspx?id=228&loc=0&PageName=residences#BuildingListings

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 4:37 PM

Ugh - I'm so sick of the brokers masquerading as Upper West Siders fleeing to Bklyn to pay top dollar. Those comments are so old!

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 4:43 PM

I think Bronstoner is more taken with decorating than with the actual "bones" of the apartment. It's nice, but all 3 bedrooms are small, and one right next to another. I don't see any pre-war charm. And if it faces South, it's right on Montague Street!

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 4:54 PM

To the brokers spouting about how cheap this place is compared to Manhattan:

Please show me comps for other apts in Bklyn! That's really the only way to make sense of price. Course, til we know what true sf is, it's hard to say what psf is for this place - folks on this list estimate 1200-1700 which is a huge variation.

Though I do wonder what happens to comps in a softening market?

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 4:55 PM

"brownstoner readers don't get this kind of place -- but there is an audience"

I agree!
I think Stoner puts these listings up every so often so as to rile up the "but you could buy a whole house instead!" contingent. It works every time.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 4:58 PM

4:43...

I live in Park Slope and I'd guess that a good 20-30% of my neighbors on my block used to live/own on the Upper West Side, so not really sure all of them can be chalked up as brokers. A lot of them do indeed move to Brooklyn.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 5:00 PM

There is status here tho. 200 Hicks is nice building. See it? In that picture there? There are only 2 apartments per floor and a couple apartments are full floor. Also part of this co-op is the building behind it (also pictured). Btw the two buildings there are only 17 units. It's full of pretty impressive people that you'd know about if you knew anything about Wall Street.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 5:06 PM

This is one of the best apartment houses in Brooklyn Heights.

Lovely, sturdy gorgeous old building.

People are buying the prestige of living in a building filled with multi millionaires and yes...even a billionaire or two...

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 5:11 PM

I'm in the 21st century but thanks for the concern. Paying 2.1 for an APARTMENT anywhere is idiotic.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 5:18 PM

I'm glad that the loft like flare didn't start a fire!

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 5:20 PM

it's 1.995.

not 2.1

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 5:27 PM

"If they get ask, they'll be LUCKY to get a 950 sf, 2 bedroom for the same price in London. Remember that when you say NYC is outrgaeous. In the major world city category, it is actually still quite inexpensive."

That is because the dollar has CRASHED AND IS WORTHLESS! Actual prices in London, Paris, etc are not that expensive if you are earning pounds or Euros. NYC is only a tad cheaper because our currency is crap.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 5:31 PM

Wow 1.995 now that's a bargain. The transplant of today sucked the life out of the city.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 5:50 PM

Ugh - comps, comps, comps - how many places in brooklyn are paying north of 1000/psf? Brownstoner - can you please stop trying to prop up the market with these completely atypical finds?

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 5:54 PM

5.11: oo, oo reflected glory! - sign me up!

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 5:54 PM

I looked at some 3 bedrooms in Brooklyn Heights about a year ago. At that time, they were clearing for around $1,000 per sq ft. The supply of 3 bedrooms in Brooklyn Height is very limited compared to two bedrooms and townhouses.

If one wants to live in Brooklyn Heights (not debating this issue either way), the town/carriage houses generally go for north of $3.0 mm. Often very north of $3.0 mm. So, the three bedroom does fit a niche and drives higher prices.

All that being said, $1.995 for a ground floor place without a view and high maintenance seems like a real stretch in this weak market.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 6:18 PM

do you people know what 200 Hicks is all about? this site is sometimes SO clueless.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 6:31 PM

But hold on! for almost 2 million dollars you can buy a whole house in Park Slope.
True it will require endless maintenance and upgrades, true you will need to shovel and sweep your sidewalk and take out your trash and fix anything that breaks yourself, and deal with tenants, but it is a house.
Who wants to buy a luxury apartment instead where all you have to do is decide where to place the art? and where the building staff will attend to your needs? People are so silly!

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 7:26 PM

My dear, it is not only on Montague Street, but it is right next door to the Heights Casino. what a horror. that place is a veritable den of iniquity. scantily clad women go in and out of there all day, on the pretense of playing raquet ball, but we know their real racket. sin. and noise. and... and..highballs.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 7:31 PM

Its like someone else said. Most posters on Brownstoner couldn't afford this place or anything like it. These are homes for a person who has assets in the millions without having to factor in some theoretical value of his current home if it sold it for some price never seen before. Real millionaire instead of paper. There are people who look at $2mm for a 3 bedroom in the Heights and think its a bargain. For a co-op like this, you will typically need to show minimum assets equal to the down payment after the purchase so you need $2mm in cash before you even bid. Yeah, the right person has to want the ground floor, but don't think $10k a month carry cost is a stretch for that person just because its a stretch for you. Same guy sends his 3 kids to a private school at $30k per kid, drives a $100k car and probably owns a million dollar beach shack south of the highway. There are plenty of people here who will say why do you need to do that when you can send you kids to PS blah blah blah and ride a bike and buy carbon tax credit offsets instead of taking summer vacation? Why? Because he works hard and can. Then others will say won't he cut back because of what's happening at Bear, Merrill, etc? Some guys will get shot, but plenty will survive and continue to buy, though with a bit more wariness. And yeah, he will probably want to live around others like him which is why he is in the Heights and the slopers are in PS. Birds of a feather...

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 7:38 PM

7:31 - Yeah, Norman pours one mean drink. Get on his good side and everything is at least a triple pour. Your squash stinks but you feel good. BTW - no "raquet ball", only squash and tennis.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 7:42 PM

7:26 - As surprising as it may be to some people on this board, not everyone wants to live in Park Slope.

I will now await the Park Slope onslaught.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 8:17 PM

Simple statement of a fact. Most high income earners are a "he." Not saying that's right. It just is. Welcome to earth and America Putnamdenizen. Where you from?

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 8:33 PM

squash! Oh my word, that is even worse than I thought.
Who would want to live next door to squashers when they could buy a nice house in a vegan, Berkely-light, aging-hippie commune near prospect park?

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 8:44 PM

8:44 - oh, oh, oh, Mr. Kotter! Not me!

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 9:32 PM

Drunk squasher! That's the best.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 9:34 PM

6:18 - re: apts in BH for $1000 sf last year - we recently sold our apt though were considering selling it last year. Last year, we had numerous brokers give us a price, and when we put it on the market in Feb, we were actually told to list the apt for a little less than we were told last year - and that was before the Bear Sterns debacle and the increasing signs of weakness in NY market (anyone notice NYT now added a new column called "The Sell" about places that are hard to sell?). So prices have not really gone up since last year and my point was that 1000 psf is a premium for prime neighborhood, prime apt - so is *already* factoring in those variables. As someone else pointed out, if you take a broader swatch of BH apts, the median psf is in the $700s psf. So charging what amounts to $1300-1600 psf (depending on the square footage which is still a mystery) is really hard to fathom - I strongly doubt there are *any* comps to support that. So, if someone buys at this price, they sound like a sucker to me.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 9:35 PM

There are plenty of upper east side 3 bedrooms for sale at the same price, in doorman buildings, for a lower maintenance. So that means Brooklyn Heights now commands the same price as Manhattan. Granted, those upper east side buildings may not be so-called "white glove", but apparently posters above believe some people will pay a huge premium to live in such a building. Because by any other measurement, this is a fairly small 3-bedroom apartment and a larger one can be had in Manhattan for the same price.

There aren't too many 2-bedroom "dumps" on the UWS going for 1.8 million -- I just did a quick search to see. There were plenty of 2-bedrooms to be had for 1.2 or 1.3 million, so perhaps those are the dumps.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 10:31 PM

I've been looking at several buildings near this one recently with 2 and 3 BR and have noticed no slowdown/softness. If anything, the high-end BH market has gone up from 1 year ago. There are still multiple offers within days of listing, all-cash offers, etc. Definitely a seller's market.

Posted by: guest at June 3, 2008 12:12 AM

What a wheeze it is when Americans try to be posh. And live in a high-rise too! I have to tell the chaps back home.

Posted by: guest at June 3, 2008 8:21 AM

9:35 - Per my conclusion, I think that this place is over-priced. I was just trying to give a base line for what 3 bedrooms in BH were trading for in 2006. I don't agree that a broader swath of comps is appropriate, since there is a really dirth of 3 bedrooms available in BHs. I'd expect that based on the economy generally and the layoffs on Wall Street locally that 3 bedrooms in BH should be trading at a discount to the $1,000 psf of 2006.

Posted by: guest at June 3, 2008 9:30 AM

I suspect this will be in contract in two weeks. Just like the place everyone here slammed for being 3.5mm in One Pierrepont.

Posted by: guest at June 3, 2008 10:22 AM

You could expect that, but I don't think that's the reality in the BH market

Posted by: guest at June 3, 2008 10:34 AM

In contract.

Sigh...

Posted by: guest at June 3, 2008 11:39 AM